Independent Living Program - Florida's Center for Child Welfare

OUTCOME AREA NOT PROVEN TO WORK MIXED FINDINGS FOUND TO WORKcare. However, there were no differences in treatment.abstinence from alcohol or other drugsbetween the two groups of adolescents.- The Brief Alcohol Screening andIntervention for College Students (BASICS)had positive impacts on some substance useoutcomes, but not on others.- Areas implementing the CommunitiesMobilizing for Change on Alcohol programsaw decreases in drunk driving arrest ratesamong adolescents but did not experiencedecreases in traffic accidents.- Women with multiple risk factorsparticipating in the Nurse-FamilyPartnership had fewer behavior problemsresulting from substance use than their controlcounterparts; however, this impact did notoccur on the full sample.Delinquency- The Summer Career Exploration - Women with multiple risk factors- Participants in Youth Corps were less likelyProgram (SCEP) did not decrease rates of participating in the Nurse-Familyto be arrested than control group members.delinquency.Partnership had fewer arrests than their - The Job Corps program led to decreased- Male participants in the Job Training control counterparts; however, this impact did arrest rates, conviction rates, and time spent inPartnership Act (JTPA), who did not have not occur on the full sample.jail among participants.an arrest record before entering the program,- Youth participating in JOBSTART were lessexperienced significant increases in arrestlikely to be arrested after the intervention thanrates at both follow-ups.control participants.i Arnett, J. (2005). The developmental context of substance use in emerging adulthood. Journal of Drug Issues, 35(2), 235-253.Miller, B., Furr-Holden, C., Voas, R., & Bright, K. (2005). Emerging adults’ substance use and risky behaviors in club settings. Journal of Drug Issues, 35(2), 357-378.Arnett, J. (1998). Learning to stand alone: The contemporary American transition to adulthood in cultural and historical context. Human Development (0018716X), 41(5/6),295-315.ii While these programs may have targeted youth from as early as 12 years old, their samples included a substantial percentage of emerging adults (aged between 18-25years) or their evaluations included sub-sample analysis of emerging adults. On the other hand, several programs that may have included some emerging adults butconstituted a small percentage of the sample or whose evaluations did not include sub-sample analysis were not included.iii http://www.childtrends.org/linksiv Child Trends Data Bank. (2008). Binge drinking. Washington, DC: Child Trends.v Child Trends Data Bank. (2008). Marijuana use. Washington, DC: Child Trends.vi Kaiser Family Foundation Fact Sheet. (2006). Sexual health statistics for teenagers and young adults in the United States. Washington, DC: Kaiser Family Foundation.vii Logan, C., Holcombe, E., Manlove, J., & Ryan, S. (2007). The consequences of unintended childbearing- A White Paper. Washington DC: Child Trends and TheNational Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.Arnett, J. (2006). The Psychology of Emerging Adulthood: What Is Known, and What Remains to Be Known?. Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21stcentury (pp. 303-330). Washington, DC US: American Psychological Association.14